Post by IbnNurAlShanti on Oct 26, 2015 1:04:45 GMT
Answering Part Three of
"Response To the Mistakes of Hanafi Fiqh Channel"
By Abdur Rahman Hasan
The times in square brackets correspond to the timings of the above video
[3:50] Abdur Rahman Hasan begins with a lie and a contradiction in one. He states that the position of tafwidh is that the characteristics mentioned in the Qur'an are mere words and letters. However previous to this he stated in his definition of tafwidh, that it means to consign the meaning of the said characteristics to Allah. If it means to consign the meaning to Allah then how is tafwidh nullifying or negating these characteristics so that they are nothing but letters and words since it is acknowledged that they have a meaning? Shaykh Mohammad Yasir has clearly stated that tafwidh is not to make the words meaningless or just blank letters but rather that these characteristics are ambigious and instead of getting into confusion about their meanings, we consign it's meaning to Allah. Either Abdur Rahman Hasan is ignorant of this or he is making himself ignorant of this, both are as bad as each other.
[6:00] Again in his faulty explanation of what tafwidh is, Abdur Rahman Hasan says the meaning is consigned then yet again goes on to say that there is no meaning it. We suggest that he and whosoever reads this, sees the concise and comprehensive definition of tafwidh that Shaykh Mohammad Yasir gave in his series from Lisan al-Arab, you may see and be assured yourself that it does not state that the intent of tafwidh is to say there is no meaning behind a thing as Abdur Rahman falsely claims.
[6:21] Here he states the modern characteristic of the Ashaa'irah of not wanting to accept certain characteristics is inherited from Jahm ibn Safwan. Again Abdur Rahman Hasan is either deluded himself or is choosing to be ignorant of the truth. Shaykh Mohammad Yasir has stated clearly in the series that the characteristics are affirmed and accepted as they have come and the meaning is consigned to Allah. Just because the Ashaa'irah choose to consign their meanings to Allah and do not take them on the apparent or literal meaning, the neo-salafis of this age falsely accuse them of negating/refusing to accept these said characteristics and this is nothing short of slander. If only Abdur Rahman Hasan watched Shaykh Mohammad Yasir's entire series before getting excited to record a refutation attempt he may be the wiser (evidence that he has not watched the entire series will be given below).
[8:42] Here Abdur Rahman narrates a story from Imam al-Bukhari's Khalq Af'al al-I'bad about Jahm ibn Safwan saying that he wishes he could remove the verse "The Most-Merciful Rose over The Throne" and that he kicked the mus'haf after reciting about Allah speaking to Musa (alayhisalaam). After stating this story, Abdur Rahman states that the hating of these characteristics and the mentioning of these verses is from the methodology of deviants. We ask, where have any of the Ashaa'irah demonstrated any dislike or any actions such as the one mentioned in the story that we should be likened to Jahm ibn Safwan in such a way? Rather if one reads our works they will see that we accept Allah's Istiwa over the arsh and Allah's speaking to Musa (alayhisalaam). Once again, just because we do not submit to the twisted interpretation that the neo-salafis want to enslave us with, we are accused of disliking these ayat and sifat of Allah, a further wretched slander. Let Abdur Rahman come forward and show us from our books where we have attempted to remove these ayat and speak against them. As mentioned earlier in this thread, we mention it again for the relevancy to what Abdur Rahman has stated:
Will Abdur Rahman also call Imam Malik (rahimahullah) a jahmi or a deviant?
[9:46] Here Abdur Rahamn states that negating (ta'til) the characteristics of Allah is the methodology of the Jahmiyyah, a statement for which he would be correct. However he then says at [9:59] right after it that tafwidh is the methodology of the Jahmiyyah and that it has no place among the salaf. Yet again, another contradiction; is ta'til (negating) the methodology of the Jahmiyyah or is tafwidh (consigning) the methodology of the Jahmiyyah, it cannot be both and with this we are sure that Abdur Rahman is confused. As for his claim that it has no place among the salaf, we will see how he fairs with his claim against the 60 quotes from the salaf on tafwidh.
[10:18] Abdur Rahman states that the salaf were known to do Ithbat al-Sifat (affirmation of the attributes), can he show us where any Ash'ari has negated the sifat of Allah. Notice also how he said that the salaf were known to have affirmed the sifat but he did not claim that the salaf affirmed them upon their apparent as the neo-salafis usually claim.
[10:28] He claims that the majority of the Qur'an are names, attributes and characteristics of Allah, and that for somebody to claim that the majority of the Qur'an's meaning is not known goes against the reason why Allah has revealed the Qur'an. As much as it is a false claim that majority of the Qur'an is mention of Allah's attributes, it's also very clear that Abdur Rahman has no idea where tafwidh is applied. Tafwidh is applied in those ayat that are mutashabih (ambigious) as Allah has mentioned there are ambiguous and clear (muhkam) ayat in the Qur'an, Allah says in Surah Al-Imran, verse 7:
It is He who has sent down to you, [O Muhammad], the Book; in it are verses [that are] precise - they are the foundation of the Book - and others unspecific. As for those in whose hearts is deviation [from truth], they will follow that of it which is unspecific, seeking discord and seeking an interpretation [suitable to them]. And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah. But those firm in knowledge say, "We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord." And no one will be reminded except those of understanding. [Sahih International]
We are saying we only do tafwidh in those verses which are ambigious (mutashabih) and Allah is saying in the Qur'an that majority of the Qur'an is clear and precise, so how have we rendered the majority of the Qur'an meaningless. Once again, we advise Abdur Rahman Hasan to watch the series thoroughly before he jumps ahead of himself.
[11:58] He states that at the end of every verse of the Qur'an you will find a name or an attribute of Allah and that Allah mentions a characteristic in just about every verse of the Qur'an. We ask, which Qur'an have you been reading brother Abdur Rahman? Indeed Allah makes mention of His names and attributes often but is it not an exaggeration to say that its the case in just about every verse of the Qur'an? Abdur Rahman should understand the differenced between the sifat al-khabariyya and sifat al-aqaliyyah that Shaykh Mohammad Yasir has explained and he can understand that among the sifat of Allah, those which tafwidh is applied upon is narrowed down even further to a very small number; further proving that his claim is baseless.
[11:36] He states that the salaf would affirm Allah's characteristics and all those after them would affirm all of Allah's names and attributes, believing in their meanings and their realities. There is no dispute here, we do not deny that any of the salaf or khalaf were upon the above, indeed we too are upon this! To claim that we deny Allah's characteristics or that we do not believe in them is a slander and had Abdur Rahman put his bias to a side and read even some of the most basic of our books he would know this. Either he is ignorant or he is making himself ignorant of the truth, both are as bad as each other!
[12:15] A quote of Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr is given wherein he claims that it is an ijma' (consensus) that all the sifat of Allah are taken literally. Firstly the consensus that Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr brings is not a consensus from the salaf. Secondly Imam Abd al-Barr's statement here regarding taking the sifat "ala'l haqiqa" means to accept the reality of the sifat, not to take the meaning literally. This is further enumerated by other statements of the Imam:
Imām Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr – may Allah have mercy upon him – said:
"And a group ascribed to the Sunna said that He, the Exalted, descends with His Essence! This statement is rejected, because He, Exalted is His mention, is not a locus for movement and He has nothing from the signs (characteristics) of the creation." [Al-Istidhkār: 8/153]
He also said in his refutation against someone who said that He descends with His Essence:
“This is rejected [laysa bī shay’in] according to the people of understanding among Ahl al-Sunna because it is a modality [kayfiyya], and they flee from that because it is only suitable for something that is directly encompassed, and Allah, the Exalted, is transendent above that.” [Al-Tamhīd: 7/143]
He also said in Al-Tamhid 18:345:
وأما قوله (يضحك الله) فمعناه يرحم عبده عند ذاك، ويتلقاها بالروح والراحة والرحمة والرأفة، وهذا مجاز مفهوم
'And as for his statement (Allah 'laughs'), it means He has mercy on His servant at that, and receives him with repose, comfort, mercy and affection; and this is a well-understood metaphor.'
So here the Imam is giving a metaphorical explanation!
Salafi Shaykh Hamd Al-Tuwaijiri (of King Sa'ud University), after rejecting Ibn Abd Al-Barr's statement comments:
لكن لعله يلتمس لابن عبدالبر عذر في ذلك، أنه فسر الصفة ببعض لوازمها ومدلولاتها، وهذا سائغ عند السلف
'However, perhaps Ibn Abd Al-Barr can be pardoned for this; he explained the Attribute as per one of its [various] connotations and considerations, and this is warranted according to the Salaf.'
So even a salafi acknowledges that giving metaphorical meanings is warranted according to the salaf, in fact Imam Ibn Rajab even states that Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr was opined to the view of ta'wil (allegorical interpretation) of Allah's attributes:
"A part of Ahl al-Hadith had inclined towards [Ta’weel] regarding the Hadith of Descent, specifically, among them: Ibn Qutaybah, al-Khattabi, and Ibn Abd al-Barr; it has been advanced on authority of [Imam] Malik, and there is dispute regarding its authenticity on his authority; a party among our companions, of those who inclined towards the discussion, adopted it .." [Ibn Rajab in Fath al-Bari 9/279]
Take note Abdur Rahman!
[14:58] Next he brings a quote of Imam al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi and then interpolates his own words "the meaning" in reference to taking the sifat on the dhahir (exterior), nowhere does the Imam make mention of "ma'na" so why is Abdur Rahman putting words into the Imams mouth? He even says in [15:30] that the Imam said "go over its apparent" which means affirm the literal words but go over them without meaning, this is a proof for tafwidh which Abdur Rahman is distorting as an evidence for affirmation according to the literal meaning! The proof that he meant take it on the literal words and not meaning is that after saying the above, he says:
"And we do not say that they [the attributes] are limbs/parts (jawarih) and we do not liken the hands, the hearing and seeing to the parts and limbs (adwat) of actions."
If those attributes were to be taken on their literal meanings, they would all necessitate limbs and parts and therefore proves that he did not mean take the literal meaning.
[15:42] He now claims to give a quote of Ibn al-Qayyim and this is an ultimate fail. Of course he would opine to the view that the sifat are taken on the literal meanings, the series that Abdur Rahman is responding to is demonstrating against Ibn al-Qayyim so how can he be used as a proof?! All of a sudden, it becomes a quote of Imam Ibn Kathir! Even then its just a statement about accepting the sifat as they came which turns out to be another evidence for tafwidh as theres no statement whatsoever about taking the attributes in the literal meaning! Abdur Rahman cannot be serious at this point!
He then goes off on a tangent speaking of the status and manaqib of Ibn Taymiyyah as though praises of other scholars deflects the problematic things that he stated and absolves him of any error. At [21:40] he mentions that a great student of his, Imam al-Dhahabi praised him with some words. However he also harshly reprimanded him which the neo-salafis will not tell you about, take a look here and let me quote just one sentence of what Imam al-Dhahabi said about Ibn Taymiyyah which is relevant here, he says:
"What are your followers but hidebound do-nothings of little intelligence, common liars with dull minds, silent outlanders strong in guile, or dryly righteous without understanding?"
Here are more critical statements on Ibn Taymiyyah from Imam al-Dhahabi:
Imam al-Dhahabi mentions that ibn Taymiyya’s followers weakened, and that he was forbidden from issuing fatawa due to his views on talaq, yet he remained stubborn on his views:
“His followers weakened and he involved himself in weighty questions that neither the intellects of his contemporaries nor their learning could bear, such as: the question of the expiation of the oath of repudiation (talaq), the opinion that repudiation (talaq) uttered three times is valid only once, and the opinion that repudiation (talaq) during menstruation is not valid. He composed writings about these topics in the order of some forty quires. Because of this, he was forbidden to issue legal opinions (fatawa). He controlled himself in a strange way and held firm to his own opinion.”
[al-Dhahabi, Nubdha in Bori, “A New Source“, 336, (Arabic Text) – 342 (English Translation)]
Imam Adh Dhahabi (D. 748AH) describes the position of Ibn Taymiyyah’s closest companions and “fans” from the unique opinions that he has:
Dhayl Tareekhil Islam pg. 328 – 329
www.archive.org/download/alhelawy06/tiz53.pdf
ولا ريب انه لا اعتبار بمدح خواصه والغلاة فيه فان الحب يحملهم على تغطية هناته بل قد يعدونها محاسن. أهـــ
“And without doubt, no consideration should be given to the praise of his closest companions or those who are extreme in their admiration for him. Their love for him will make them cover his mistakes, nay they may even count them to be from his good deeds.”
Courtesy of Shaykh Abdur Rahman Sondalaani:
forum.aslein.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=117
Imam al-Dhahabi (D. 748AH) said in Dhuyool Al ‘Ibar fee Khabari man Ghabar, page 84:
s203841464.onlinehome.us/waqfeya/books/10/0923/0923_4.rar
وله مسائل غريبة نيل من عرضه لأجلها
“And he has strange (rulings on) issues, due to which his repute was under fire”
Courtesy of Shaykh Abdur Rahman Sondalaani:
forum.aslein.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=117
Imam al-Dhahabi (D. 748AH) said in Al Mu’jam Al Mukhtass bil Muhadditheen, on page 25 (pg 45 in the PDF reader), bio #22:
www.archive.org/download/waq1281/1281.pdf
وانفرد بمسائل فنيل من عرضه لأجلها, وهو بشر له ذنوب وخطأ ومع هذا فوالله ما مقلت عينِي مثله ولا رأى هو مثله نفسه. أهــ
“And he went alone on issues that, because of them his repute was under fire. And he is a man. He has sins and mistakes. Yet despite this, by Allah, my eyes have never seen the likes of him, nor has he seen the likes of himself.”
Courtesy of Shaykh Abdur Rahman Sondalaani:
forum.aslein.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=117
In his book, Tadhkiratul Huffaadh pg 1497, Al Imam Adh Dhahabi (D. 748AH) mentions about his teacher Ibn Taymiyyah:
www.archive.org/download/waq1331/1331.pdf
وقد انفرد بفتاوى نيل من عرضه لأجلها وهي مغمورة في بحر علمه, فالله تعالى يسامحه ويرضى عنه فما رأيت مثله. وكل واحد من الأمة فيؤخذ من قوله ويترك فكان ماذا؟ أهـــ
“And he went alone to make unique fatawas, due to which his repute came under fire. Yet they are submerged in the ocean of his knowledge. So may Allah forgive him and be pleased with him, for I have never seen anyone like him. And since the case with everyone in the Muslim Ummah is that some of their statements may be accepted and others may be rejected, what is the problem?”
Courtesy of Shaykh Abdur Rahman Sondalaani:
forum.aslein.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=117
Imam Adh Dhahabi (D. 748AH) said about his teacher Ibn Taymiyyah:
مع أني مخالف له في مسائل أصلية وفرعية
“However I disagree with him in creedal and legal issues.”
See pg 329 of Dhayl Tareekh Al Islam:
www.archive.org/download/alhelawy06/tiz53.pdf
Courtesy of Shaykh Abdur Rahman Sondalaani:
forum.aslein.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=117
All the above and more regarding his arrogance, rightful accusations of lying and more found here: taymiyyun.wordpress.com/?s=dhahabi
[33:28] Here Abdur Rahman mentions a quote of Imam Ibn Daq'iq al-I'd apparently praising Ibn Taymiyyah by saying "I saw a man, all the sciences laid before his eyes, he takes from what he wishes and leaves from it what he wishes." However this quote is incomplete, it continues as Imam Ibn Daq'iq was further asked; "Why didn't you debate him?" to which he replied: "He loves to speak and I love silence." See how the neo-salafis take quotes which are far from praises and twist them to support those that they admire!
Reply to part 4 coming soon insha'Allah!
[6:00] Again in his faulty explanation of what tafwidh is, Abdur Rahman Hasan says the meaning is consigned then yet again goes on to say that there is no meaning it. We suggest that he and whosoever reads this, sees the concise and comprehensive definition of tafwidh that Shaykh Mohammad Yasir gave in his series from Lisan al-Arab, you may see and be assured yourself that it does not state that the intent of tafwidh is to say there is no meaning behind a thing as Abdur Rahman falsely claims.
[6:21] Here he states the modern characteristic of the Ashaa'irah of not wanting to accept certain characteristics is inherited from Jahm ibn Safwan. Again Abdur Rahman Hasan is either deluded himself or is choosing to be ignorant of the truth. Shaykh Mohammad Yasir has stated clearly in the series that the characteristics are affirmed and accepted as they have come and the meaning is consigned to Allah. Just because the Ashaa'irah choose to consign their meanings to Allah and do not take them on the apparent or literal meaning, the neo-salafis of this age falsely accuse them of negating/refusing to accept these said characteristics and this is nothing short of slander. If only Abdur Rahman Hasan watched Shaykh Mohammad Yasir's entire series before getting excited to record a refutation attempt he may be the wiser (evidence that he has not watched the entire series will be given below).
[8:42] Here Abdur Rahman narrates a story from Imam al-Bukhari's Khalq Af'al al-I'bad about Jahm ibn Safwan saying that he wishes he could remove the verse "The Most-Merciful Rose over The Throne" and that he kicked the mus'haf after reciting about Allah speaking to Musa (alayhisalaam). After stating this story, Abdur Rahman states that the hating of these characteristics and the mentioning of these verses is from the methodology of deviants. We ask, where have any of the Ashaa'irah demonstrated any dislike or any actions such as the one mentioned in the story that we should be likened to Jahm ibn Safwan in such a way? Rather if one reads our works they will see that we accept Allah's Istiwa over the arsh and Allah's speaking to Musa (alayhisalaam). Once again, just because we do not submit to the twisted interpretation that the neo-salafis want to enslave us with, we are accused of disliking these ayat and sifat of Allah, a further wretched slander. Let Abdur Rahman come forward and show us from our books where we have attempted to remove these ayat and speak against them. As mentioned earlier in this thread, we mention it again for the relevancy to what Abdur Rahman has stated:
Imam Ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani al-Maliki (b. 310 – d. 386 AH) mentioned in his Kitab al-Jami, translated into English by Abdas Samad Clarke under the title: “A Madinan View on the Sunnah, courtesy, wisdom, battles and history” (Taha publishers, London, 1999, p. 30):
Someone said, ‘What about one who narrates the hadith, ‘Allah created Adam on his form,’ and that ‘Allah will unveil His shank on the Day of Resurrection,’ and that ‘He will put His hand into Jahannam and bring out whomever He wills out of it’, and He (Malik) rejected them strenuously, and forbade anyone to narrate them. Someone said, ‘Ibn Ijlan has narrated it.’ He said, ‘He was not one of the people of fiqh.’ Malik did not reject the hadith of ‘descent’ nor the hadith of ‘laughter.’ Someone said, ‘What about the hadith that ‘the Throne shook because of the death of Sa’d?’ He said, ‘It should not be narrated, and what call has a man to narrate that when he sees what danger it contains?’”
Someone said, ‘What about one who narrates the hadith, ‘Allah created Adam on his form,’ and that ‘Allah will unveil His shank on the Day of Resurrection,’ and that ‘He will put His hand into Jahannam and bring out whomever He wills out of it’, and He (Malik) rejected them strenuously, and forbade anyone to narrate them. Someone said, ‘Ibn Ijlan has narrated it.’ He said, ‘He was not one of the people of fiqh.’ Malik did not reject the hadith of ‘descent’ nor the hadith of ‘laughter.’ Someone said, ‘What about the hadith that ‘the Throne shook because of the death of Sa’d?’ He said, ‘It should not be narrated, and what call has a man to narrate that when he sees what danger it contains?’”
Will Abdur Rahman also call Imam Malik (rahimahullah) a jahmi or a deviant?
[9:46] Here Abdur Rahamn states that negating (ta'til) the characteristics of Allah is the methodology of the Jahmiyyah, a statement for which he would be correct. However he then says at [9:59] right after it that tafwidh is the methodology of the Jahmiyyah and that it has no place among the salaf. Yet again, another contradiction; is ta'til (negating) the methodology of the Jahmiyyah or is tafwidh (consigning) the methodology of the Jahmiyyah, it cannot be both and with this we are sure that Abdur Rahman is confused. As for his claim that it has no place among the salaf, we will see how he fairs with his claim against the 60 quotes from the salaf on tafwidh.
[10:18] Abdur Rahman states that the salaf were known to do Ithbat al-Sifat (affirmation of the attributes), can he show us where any Ash'ari has negated the sifat of Allah. Notice also how he said that the salaf were known to have affirmed the sifat but he did not claim that the salaf affirmed them upon their apparent as the neo-salafis usually claim.
[10:28] He claims that the majority of the Qur'an are names, attributes and characteristics of Allah, and that for somebody to claim that the majority of the Qur'an's meaning is not known goes against the reason why Allah has revealed the Qur'an. As much as it is a false claim that majority of the Qur'an is mention of Allah's attributes, it's also very clear that Abdur Rahman has no idea where tafwidh is applied. Tafwidh is applied in those ayat that are mutashabih (ambigious) as Allah has mentioned there are ambiguous and clear (muhkam) ayat in the Qur'an, Allah says in Surah Al-Imran, verse 7:
It is He who has sent down to you, [O Muhammad], the Book; in it are verses [that are] precise - they are the foundation of the Book - and others unspecific. As for those in whose hearts is deviation [from truth], they will follow that of it which is unspecific, seeking discord and seeking an interpretation [suitable to them]. And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah. But those firm in knowledge say, "We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord." And no one will be reminded except those of understanding. [Sahih International]
We are saying we only do tafwidh in those verses which are ambigious (mutashabih) and Allah is saying in the Qur'an that majority of the Qur'an is clear and precise, so how have we rendered the majority of the Qur'an meaningless. Once again, we advise Abdur Rahman Hasan to watch the series thoroughly before he jumps ahead of himself.
[11:58] He states that at the end of every verse of the Qur'an you will find a name or an attribute of Allah and that Allah mentions a characteristic in just about every verse of the Qur'an. We ask, which Qur'an have you been reading brother Abdur Rahman? Indeed Allah makes mention of His names and attributes often but is it not an exaggeration to say that its the case in just about every verse of the Qur'an? Abdur Rahman should understand the differenced between the sifat al-khabariyya and sifat al-aqaliyyah that Shaykh Mohammad Yasir has explained and he can understand that among the sifat of Allah, those which tafwidh is applied upon is narrowed down even further to a very small number; further proving that his claim is baseless.
[11:36] He states that the salaf would affirm Allah's characteristics and all those after them would affirm all of Allah's names and attributes, believing in their meanings and their realities. There is no dispute here, we do not deny that any of the salaf or khalaf were upon the above, indeed we too are upon this! To claim that we deny Allah's characteristics or that we do not believe in them is a slander and had Abdur Rahman put his bias to a side and read even some of the most basic of our books he would know this. Either he is ignorant or he is making himself ignorant of the truth, both are as bad as each other!
[12:15] A quote of Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr is given wherein he claims that it is an ijma' (consensus) that all the sifat of Allah are taken literally. Firstly the consensus that Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr brings is not a consensus from the salaf. Secondly Imam Abd al-Barr's statement here regarding taking the sifat "ala'l haqiqa" means to accept the reality of the sifat, not to take the meaning literally. This is further enumerated by other statements of the Imam:
Imām Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr – may Allah have mercy upon him – said:
"And a group ascribed to the Sunna said that He, the Exalted, descends with His Essence! This statement is rejected, because He, Exalted is His mention, is not a locus for movement and He has nothing from the signs (characteristics) of the creation." [Al-Istidhkār: 8/153]
He also said in his refutation against someone who said that He descends with His Essence:
“This is rejected [laysa bī shay’in] according to the people of understanding among Ahl al-Sunna because it is a modality [kayfiyya], and they flee from that because it is only suitable for something that is directly encompassed, and Allah, the Exalted, is transendent above that.” [Al-Tamhīd: 7/143]
He also said in Al-Tamhid 18:345:
وأما قوله (يضحك الله) فمعناه يرحم عبده عند ذاك، ويتلقاها بالروح والراحة والرحمة والرأفة، وهذا مجاز مفهوم
'And as for his statement (Allah 'laughs'), it means He has mercy on His servant at that, and receives him with repose, comfort, mercy and affection; and this is a well-understood metaphor.'
So here the Imam is giving a metaphorical explanation!
Salafi Shaykh Hamd Al-Tuwaijiri (of King Sa'ud University), after rejecting Ibn Abd Al-Barr's statement comments:
لكن لعله يلتمس لابن عبدالبر عذر في ذلك، أنه فسر الصفة ببعض لوازمها ومدلولاتها، وهذا سائغ عند السلف
'However, perhaps Ibn Abd Al-Barr can be pardoned for this; he explained the Attribute as per one of its [various] connotations and considerations, and this is warranted according to the Salaf.'
So even a salafi acknowledges that giving metaphorical meanings is warranted according to the salaf, in fact Imam Ibn Rajab even states that Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr was opined to the view of ta'wil (allegorical interpretation) of Allah's attributes:
"A part of Ahl al-Hadith had inclined towards [Ta’weel] regarding the Hadith of Descent, specifically, among them: Ibn Qutaybah, al-Khattabi, and Ibn Abd al-Barr; it has been advanced on authority of [Imam] Malik, and there is dispute regarding its authenticity on his authority; a party among our companions, of those who inclined towards the discussion, adopted it .." [Ibn Rajab in Fath al-Bari 9/279]
Take note Abdur Rahman!
[14:58] Next he brings a quote of Imam al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi and then interpolates his own words "the meaning" in reference to taking the sifat on the dhahir (exterior), nowhere does the Imam make mention of "ma'na" so why is Abdur Rahman putting words into the Imams mouth? He even says in [15:30] that the Imam said "go over its apparent" which means affirm the literal words but go over them without meaning, this is a proof for tafwidh which Abdur Rahman is distorting as an evidence for affirmation according to the literal meaning! The proof that he meant take it on the literal words and not meaning is that after saying the above, he says:
"And we do not say that they [the attributes] are limbs/parts (jawarih) and we do not liken the hands, the hearing and seeing to the parts and limbs (adwat) of actions."
If those attributes were to be taken on their literal meanings, they would all necessitate limbs and parts and therefore proves that he did not mean take the literal meaning.
[15:42] He now claims to give a quote of Ibn al-Qayyim and this is an ultimate fail. Of course he would opine to the view that the sifat are taken on the literal meanings, the series that Abdur Rahman is responding to is demonstrating against Ibn al-Qayyim so how can he be used as a proof?! All of a sudden, it becomes a quote of Imam Ibn Kathir! Even then its just a statement about accepting the sifat as they came which turns out to be another evidence for tafwidh as theres no statement whatsoever about taking the attributes in the literal meaning! Abdur Rahman cannot be serious at this point!
He then goes off on a tangent speaking of the status and manaqib of Ibn Taymiyyah as though praises of other scholars deflects the problematic things that he stated and absolves him of any error. At [21:40] he mentions that a great student of his, Imam al-Dhahabi praised him with some words. However he also harshly reprimanded him which the neo-salafis will not tell you about, take a look here and let me quote just one sentence of what Imam al-Dhahabi said about Ibn Taymiyyah which is relevant here, he says:
"What are your followers but hidebound do-nothings of little intelligence, common liars with dull minds, silent outlanders strong in guile, or dryly righteous without understanding?"
Here are more critical statements on Ibn Taymiyyah from Imam al-Dhahabi:
Imam al-Dhahabi mentions that ibn Taymiyya’s followers weakened, and that he was forbidden from issuing fatawa due to his views on talaq, yet he remained stubborn on his views:
“His followers weakened and he involved himself in weighty questions that neither the intellects of his contemporaries nor their learning could bear, such as: the question of the expiation of the oath of repudiation (talaq), the opinion that repudiation (talaq) uttered three times is valid only once, and the opinion that repudiation (talaq) during menstruation is not valid. He composed writings about these topics in the order of some forty quires. Because of this, he was forbidden to issue legal opinions (fatawa). He controlled himself in a strange way and held firm to his own opinion.”
[al-Dhahabi, Nubdha in Bori, “A New Source“, 336, (Arabic Text) – 342 (English Translation)]
Imam Adh Dhahabi (D. 748AH) describes the position of Ibn Taymiyyah’s closest companions and “fans” from the unique opinions that he has:
Dhayl Tareekhil Islam pg. 328 – 329
www.archive.org/download/alhelawy06/tiz53.pdf
ولا ريب انه لا اعتبار بمدح خواصه والغلاة فيه فان الحب يحملهم على تغطية هناته بل قد يعدونها محاسن. أهـــ
“And without doubt, no consideration should be given to the praise of his closest companions or those who are extreme in their admiration for him. Their love for him will make them cover his mistakes, nay they may even count them to be from his good deeds.”
Courtesy of Shaykh Abdur Rahman Sondalaani:
forum.aslein.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=117
Imam al-Dhahabi (D. 748AH) said in Dhuyool Al ‘Ibar fee Khabari man Ghabar, page 84:
s203841464.onlinehome.us/waqfeya/books/10/0923/0923_4.rar
وله مسائل غريبة نيل من عرضه لأجلها
“And he has strange (rulings on) issues, due to which his repute was under fire”
Courtesy of Shaykh Abdur Rahman Sondalaani:
forum.aslein.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=117
Imam al-Dhahabi (D. 748AH) said in Al Mu’jam Al Mukhtass bil Muhadditheen, on page 25 (pg 45 in the PDF reader), bio #22:
www.archive.org/download/waq1281/1281.pdf
وانفرد بمسائل فنيل من عرضه لأجلها, وهو بشر له ذنوب وخطأ ومع هذا فوالله ما مقلت عينِي مثله ولا رأى هو مثله نفسه. أهــ
“And he went alone on issues that, because of them his repute was under fire. And he is a man. He has sins and mistakes. Yet despite this, by Allah, my eyes have never seen the likes of him, nor has he seen the likes of himself.”
Courtesy of Shaykh Abdur Rahman Sondalaani:
forum.aslein.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=117
In his book, Tadhkiratul Huffaadh pg 1497, Al Imam Adh Dhahabi (D. 748AH) mentions about his teacher Ibn Taymiyyah:
www.archive.org/download/waq1331/1331.pdf
وقد انفرد بفتاوى نيل من عرضه لأجلها وهي مغمورة في بحر علمه, فالله تعالى يسامحه ويرضى عنه فما رأيت مثله. وكل واحد من الأمة فيؤخذ من قوله ويترك فكان ماذا؟ أهـــ
“And he went alone to make unique fatawas, due to which his repute came under fire. Yet they are submerged in the ocean of his knowledge. So may Allah forgive him and be pleased with him, for I have never seen anyone like him. And since the case with everyone in the Muslim Ummah is that some of their statements may be accepted and others may be rejected, what is the problem?”
Courtesy of Shaykh Abdur Rahman Sondalaani:
forum.aslein.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=117
Imam Adh Dhahabi (D. 748AH) said about his teacher Ibn Taymiyyah:
مع أني مخالف له في مسائل أصلية وفرعية
“However I disagree with him in creedal and legal issues.”
See pg 329 of Dhayl Tareekh Al Islam:
www.archive.org/download/alhelawy06/tiz53.pdf
Courtesy of Shaykh Abdur Rahman Sondalaani:
forum.aslein.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=117
All the above and more regarding his arrogance, rightful accusations of lying and more found here: taymiyyun.wordpress.com/?s=dhahabi
[33:28] Here Abdur Rahman mentions a quote of Imam Ibn Daq'iq al-I'd apparently praising Ibn Taymiyyah by saying "I saw a man, all the sciences laid before his eyes, he takes from what he wishes and leaves from it what he wishes." However this quote is incomplete, it continues as Imam Ibn Daq'iq was further asked; "Why didn't you debate him?" to which he replied: "He loves to speak and I love silence." See how the neo-salafis take quotes which are far from praises and twist them to support those that they admire!
Reply to part 4 coming soon insha'Allah!